About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
to michelle obama for raising the national conversation about obesity and health and nutrition. on the one side. on the other hand, too, these products are so compelling. i like to call them the foods we hate to love because, you know, it's hard to talk about something that you love to eat in negative, in negative tones. >> host: michael moss, what was the reception from the food companies when you approached them about "salt sugar fat"? >> guest: i think that they were actually -- i mean, i was surprised by how willing they were to talk to me. and i started off with a trove of internal documents which helped tremendously. these thousands and thousands of pages put me at the table as the largest companies were plotting and planning and formulating their way to creating new products. those documents enabled me to convince their top scientists, marketing officials, ceos in some cases to talk to me and reveal even more secrets. and so -- and i was really surprised by how many companies have a cabal of insiders who are genuinely concerned about obesity and health issues associated with their p
someone like newt gingrich running for president and he calls president barack obama the food stamp president, on one level he can say i'm talking about how more people went on food stamps during barack obama's presidency than any other president. you can dispute that figure or not, and some people have, but that is what he says he means there but there's another meaning on top of it, where black people are associated with welfare programs. welfare programs are considered undesirable. the term welfare is determined undesirable, and if you can connect a black president with the idea the is handing free stuff to people to get them to vote for him, that's an association that can work with voters. and indeed people, journalists who interviewed folks who voted in the south carolina primary where gingrich won the republican contest, said that idea was a strong one for them. that association was something they agreed with. so, we see even now politicians can use this coded language, reach the people they want to reach, but also be able to deny they're using that tactic because there's anot
soon. it is an old publication, 1944. >> david harsanyi, author of "obama's 4 horsemen: the disasters unleashed by obama's reelection," thanks. .. >> scott spiker, he was a very young, at the time, navy pilot and the father of two, had a nice family started down in jacksonville, florida. why any interest in them? the initial starting interest. the time when he went missing in the red headlines. at bottom of this was kind of odd. why are they looking for in? why are they doing this? why are they doing this to make certain protocols are followed when something like this happens. if you think about this in terms of how i would think about it, 1994. i started to get more interested and interested in what was going on because i would you things here and there. people would just talk with me. i went back. and by the time i got to the end of the 90's the administration kept talking about it in the media. but going back and try to piece together the story and see what they're saying and what they want saying to read in my mind, the way my mind works is, these pieces of reformation are a mosai
the president obama's continued engagement in the libyan hostility. apparently contrary to the war powers resolution, which thinks is constitutional but as he told my class, he said but it's not constitutional as to all applications. and apparently the obama administration felt it would be unconstitutional for congress to provide too many limits on the president's power to conduct hostilities against libya. now where those are we don't really know. so the commander-in-chief clause is actually a very important constitutional provision. and logan's project i think is the first one to actually give it some legal purchase. what might've been the official meaning of the commander-in-chief clause. because windows was drafted at philadelphia, i think the only commander-in-chief bid on was george washington. they certainly did not have george iii in mind. they did not have even governors in mind. governors were also the heads of the militias in various states. those also not their goal. but instead their model, if they had one, they probably did, was george washington. one of the many things loga
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4